New York Times Editorial Invokes Same Old Propagandistic Lies

merica’s role as a bastion of the highest caliber mock-journalism was affirmed in today’s New York Times editorial, commenting on the recent Kansas State Board of Education election. Making no pretense of interest in truth and objectivity, the New York Times let flow as unbridled a delivery of religious dogma as has ever been preached from the pulpit of an editorial sanctuary.

Entitled “Kansas, Evolving,” the piece begins with a standard element of fundamentalist dogma in every denomination of humanistic scientism, stating that “The earth is billions of years old...” Never mind the fact that the (understandably) nameless New York Times editorialist, if pressed, could never produce a single shred of empirical scientific evidence that unequivocally supports the belief she is espousing so matter-of-factly. Never mind the fact that she—like all her fellow parishioners—is counting on the high-priests of the self-described “scientific community” to hold the mysteries that supposedly substantiate those jealously defended beliefs. And never mind that she—journalistic poseur that she is—hasn’t dared to enter the temple long enough to take a clear-headed gander at the relics that serve as the basis of the very religion for which she serves as an evangelist, and into which she is sinking her moral anchor, both for now and eternity.

Accusing members of the Kansas State Board of Education of attempting to “deprive” Kansas “children
of modern scientific thinking,” the editorialist/propagandist betrays a woeful (and most likely willfull) ignorance of both the meaning of the term “scientific thinking” and of the truth concerning what actually took place in Kansas last year. Contrary to the misguided, faith-based predispositions of the Times editorialist, genuine “scientific thinking” has never consisted of blindly swallowing as gospel the most popular myth of the day—yet precisely such a perspective had to be an essential prerequisite to writing the contents of this Times propaganda gem. And the editorialist doesn’t site (because she is utterly incapable of doing so) any documentation of the Board’s alleged effort to remove genuine “scientific thinking” from Kansas education system—unless one defines “scientific thinking” according to the narrow, religious dogma of humanistic scientism.

The editorialist’s wholly deceptive claim (read: lie) that the Board “gutted statewide science standards” to “eliminate evolution as an explanation of the origin of species” is further indictment of the writer’s incredible ignorance of the facts surrounding the issue. If pressed, she would be entirely incapable of producing any substantiation of these fabricated accusations—yet the New York Times apparently considers facts to be unnecessary baggage when it comes to defending the faith. Kansas science standards were in no way “gutted”—nor was evolution by any means “eliminated”—as anyone even marginally familiar with the facts would know. Yet the New York Times has seen fit to perpetuate the same propagandistic lies that have been promulgated from the pulpits of “the faithful” ever since their religion lost its status as unquestionable “truth” in the state of Kansas. (Apparently, they early recognized that a level playing field presented a serious disadvantage to their dogma vis-à-vis the empirical facts of science [nobody said they were stupid!].)

Suggesting that the dogmas of evolution and the Big Bang comprise the “common sense” side of the origins debate, the New York Times editorialist attributes a “religious zeal” to the objects of her false accusations, conveniently neglecting to acknowledge the unmistakable religious zeal with which she herself invokes a popular-level, urban-myth style ignorance to suggest that Kansas children’s education was “threatened” by the Kansas Board’s actions of last year.

The religious hypocrisy of the Times editorialist finds its nadir in the reactionary accusation that the Kansas Board sought to “repudiate modern science in the name of religion.” Without question, by “modern science” she means evolutionary dogma. Anyone who has been following the origins debate with anything more than the superficial pretensions typical of American journalists will recognize this.

And finally, in a telling, further denial of the facts, the New York Times editorialist asserts that, were it not for the pending—and purely contrived—“return” of evolution to Kansas curricula, the state’s children “would be left behind ... a matter of natural selection.” She obviously thinks that our epidemic levels of teen pregnancy and juvenile violence (including murder)—just to name two examples—are an evolutionary “advancement” from which our culture’s youth shouldn’t be “left behind.” Time will tell, however, how far the evolutionary religious myth and its tax-funded indoctrination will have to go before Americans (not just the ones in Kansas) see that it is devoid of a viable scientific basis, and that it serves as the springboard for so much of our culture’s moral degradation.

“[E]very careless word that men shall speak, they shall render account for it in the day of judgment. For by your words you shall be justified, and by your words you shall be condemned.” — Jesus Christ (Matt 12:36,37)

I, for one, won’t want to be in the shoes of the New York Times editorial staff when it comes time to answer for stuff like the August 4, 2000 “editorial”!